i was just in a match with 2 rank or level 20's i'm a level 52 but i was buddied up with a person 9 and they decided to go all out on m1a1's leopards 2A4 and challengers with amx-32s and aa guns they ripped through the left of the map with those so i thought of a clever but sinister plan what if they left there cvs unguarded sure enough i found 3 cvs with my recon chopper and i ended up killing all the cvs my buddy or partner did really almost nothing but die i ended up winning and them calling my tactic nooby even tho i won and then they decided to calling me a noob in which i replied (haha) whats wrong with people:)

Well a lot of people have the attitude that you should fight on there conditions and like they except you to. I have had one arty spammer who got mad at me because I counter artyd him. On guy who became mad because I would not attack him frontally but just did flanking attacks

Something that I found interesting in my own game play was the way I noticed myself avoiding the use of certain kinds of units because they have been abused by so many people. the unfortunate side effect is that I've lost some matches because I didn't equip my troops with some of the better types of weapons available to me for fear of being called a noob or a spammer. I've even avoided using certain tactics that were a normal part of the proposed conflict for the same reasons. When does a concentration of force cease being a tactic and become a spamfest? How many units of Arty, Helos, Tanks or Infantry is too much? I'll bet a lot of our community members have very different answers. Since we don't have some of the things that are available in other games and sometimes have to create a "shielding force" to perform an attack, how does one tell the difference between that and spamming?

I am of the opinion that I should use the best type of firepower in a smaller, more concise group. Maybe 4 T-64BM tanks, two SHTURMs, two TUNGUSKAs (the higher tier ones.) and a group of infantry.And whatever points I have left, I will dedicate it to getting counter troops to what my enemy throws at me, be it paratroopers to drop behind arty spammers, more AA, more tanks, anything. That's my counter to spam, also the way I normally play, small, but extremely well trained troops will win me most encounters, be it against PACT or NATO forces.

I have used lots of tactics in the past year, some spammy, ( BTR rush with 70 BTR Soviets is much fun), and some very combined arms and snipey ( Fully vetted, 3 t80s, backed with tunguska, t62M1, Strela 10, BMP1D & SF, moveing slowly and c\refully). Both are different. both have their uses. Neither are invalid, and both can piss people off if they're not prepared. People are people, and some dont like losing. Watever tactics you use are valid, if the game allows it, although I do have to admit, Heli spam is quite annoying. The key to counter it is merely to keep 200 pts in reserve, then buy 10 shilkas as soon as you see a big clump of angry bee helicopters coming your way. Its like rain, when they meet......he he.

This is a game. There are rules. I had a game last night where it was total destruction, and the key to that is keeling more zones and attriting the other guy. Our team killed theirs. I used lots of rushes and big casualty attacks because, wel, I could afford it as I have more command zones. they defended well, always killed us 2:1, but kept losing more zones. Ended up, inevitably, with them hiding a cv, us finding it and them losing.

their response? 'Worst game ever...' 'we won because you lost more points' etc.

Well, no, check the vistory conditions. If it was a first to 2000 pts, then I would not have rushed up the road with 16 chieftains in a line. But it wasnt, I could afford the losses, and they lost a command because of it.